Page 13 of 17 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 164

Thread: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

  1. #121
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    So again, back to the actual evidence. You know, that stuff you keep avoiding.
    Actually, I've provided news links on multiple occasions. I've asked for links for your statements that the jury did not reject the self-defense alibi. I received none. I'm not surprised, because there was no such outcome.

    I've posted news stories that revealed that the teens were unarmed, Davis was sitting inside the vehicle when shot, the Durango was attempting to drive away when the shots were fired, Dunn never reported the shooting, etc.

    I've also noted that Dunn was not a credible witness. He claimed Davis was outside and posed a threat to him. The Medical Examiner revealed that Davis was inside the vehicle and sitting when shot. Sometime after the incident Dunn concocted a story that a shotgun had been pointed at him. His fiance told the court that Dunn never mentioned a gun to her. The teens were found to have been unarmed and none of the witnesses saw a gun.

    Those are two examples where Dunn's testimony was in conflict with what others said and/or other evidence. Given those and other differences, I've made clear, I don't accept Dunn's account. It wasn't believable. Moreover, even if a theoretical actual or perceived threat existed (it didn't), the threat had ended when the teens were attempting to drive away.

    The two juries, both of which had the full set of information rather than the more limited information that was published by the media, also drew the conclusion that he did not act in self-defense. If he had, there would have been no convictions as the bullets would have been deemed to have been fired at the alleged threat not indiscriminately at the others. So no, the jury didn't by the self-defense claim.

    That two juries reached the same conclusion that Dunn deserved to be convicted on at least second degree murder reduces the probability of jury error. The notion that the juries didn't "understand the evidence" in reaching their verdict is a vast stretch.

  2. #122
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,444

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Mercenary | Define Mercenary at Dictionary.com



    They fit all 3 definitions. Stating anything else is semantics.
    Unfortunately for you, The Geneva Convention doesn't use Webster's to define mercenary. Even more unfortunate for you, they still don't neet the definition you provided, because they weren't fighting for a foreign army.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  3. #123
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,444

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    This is what you said....




    So yes, it is what you said. Your civil rights comment was shot down several posts ago and then you mentioned contracts with the government. Don't run away from what you said. Man up and own it.
    Civil rights is what I meant, becausw I referred to civil right in a previous post and you damn well know it. Don't resort to lieing, just to try and win an argument. That's cowardly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  4. #124
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Civil rights is what I meant, becausw I referred to civil right in a previous post and you damn well know it. Don't resort to lieing, just to try and win an argument. That's cowardly.
    You might have "meant" civil rights. But in that post you talked about contracts with the government and making sure that you had a contract for protection also. I didn't lie. The proof is right there in the post. Instead of claiming that I was lying and you "meant" "civil rights" then you should have just admitted you made a mistake instead of posting this and calling me a liar.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  5. #125
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Actually, I've provided news links on multiple occasions.
    Which has nothing to do with what I said,
    You keep avoiding the actual evidence and keep going to stuff like a reporters opinion which is irrelevant.
    Obviously you purposely left it out of what you quoted because you want to avoid it.

    So again, back to the stuff you keep avoiding, the actual evidence.

    Lets see if you will at least be honest here. (so far you have failed)

    The evidence says that Davis was the only one angry and irate and it was directed towards Dunn.
    It also shows that Davis got out of the Durango as Dunn stated.

    So for what purpose do you suppose the angry and irate Davis got out of the vehicle?
    The only logical conclusion from the evidence would be to carry through with his threats to Dunn.
    No other reason exists.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I've asked for links for your statements that the jury did not reject the self-defense alibi. I received none.

    Stop with the dishonesty.
    I just provided you the information which was being spoken about.
    There were jurors who believed his account the first time.
    Which is why the crap you spew is nonsense.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I've posted news stories that revealed that the teens were unarmed,

    And?
    A reporter's opinion means absolutely squat. The actual evidence (you know, that stuff you wont discuss and continually avoid) leaves open the possibility that Davis had been armed.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Davis was sitting inside the vehicle when shot, the Durango was attempting to drive away when the shots were fired, Dunn never reported the shooting, etc.

    And as already pointed out to you, her testimony wasn't even credible, and it was destroyed on cross. The angle of the entry wounds does not suggest he was sitting there.
    You again have nothing and instead argue nonsense, all because you do not know the evidence.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I've also noted that Dunn was not a credible witness.
    Which isn't true, as previously pointed out there were those jurors who did believe him and people who still do.
    You have nothing but false claims.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    He claimed Davis was outside and posed a threat to him.
    Learn the evidence and stop ignoring it when it is provided to you.

    Davis got out of the vehicle.
    It is a claim that is supported by testimony of Davis's friend.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The Medical Examiner revealed that Davis was inside the vehicle and sitting when shot.
    Irrelevant as it was shown during trial that that wasn't true.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Sometime after the incident Dunn concocted a story that a shotgun had been pointed at him.
    Just another false claim by you.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    His fiance told the court that Dunn never mentioned a gun to her.
    Still going in circles.
    Her, an emotionally unstable person, not remembering what she was told means absolutely nothing.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The teens were found to have been unarmed and none of the witnesses saw a gun.
    Yet their suspicious activity in the other parking lot, and in leaving that area leaves open the possibility that there was a gun. Especially as they didn't bother to tell the police about being in the other parking lot.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    It wasn't believable.
    Suuuuurrrrrrrreeeee!
    That's why jurors from the first trial believed him and other folks still do.
    You speak nonsense.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Moreover, even if a theoretical actual or perceived threat existed (it didn't), the threat had ended when the teens were attempting to drive away.
    Bs!
    Davis wasn't the driver. His being a threat doesn't just magically disappear because the vehicle he jumped back into backed up and stopped immediately behind you,. THat put the threat just feet away. D'oh! That is still a threat.
    The threat could only have ended once the vehicle was far enough away making any possible return fire ineffective.

    Which just shows that jurors do get things wrong all the time.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The two juries, both of which had the full set of information rather than the more limited information that was published by the media, also drew the conclusion that he did not act in self-defense.
    This is you not paying attention and not understanding what occurred, leading you to again make a false claim.
    Members of the first jury did believe him, as shown, that is why the jury was hung.
    The first juries decision on the other charges is irrespective of the first, especially as he could not claim self defense as they did nothing to warrant the use of self defense. Your continued failure to understand that is your problem.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    If he had, there would have been no convictions as the bullets would have been deemed to have been fired at the alleged threat not indiscriminately at the others. So no, the jury didn't by the self-defense claim.
    Simply wrong, all because you do not know what you are talking about.
    There were 3 jurors who wanted to acquit. That is why the jury was hung.
    Nor would have an acquittal changed any verdict the jury rendered in regards to the other charges. Only the trial Judge or the appellate process could have overturned them.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    That two juries reached the same conclusion that Dunn deserved to be convicted on at least second degree murder reduces the probability of jury error.
    Said the guy who knows not of what he speaks.
    The Juries decisions are separate and distinct from each other and deal with two separate set of facts and law.
    There is no reduction in the probability of Jury error. What an absurd claim to make.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The notion that the juries didn't "understand the evidence" in reaching their verdict is a vast stretch.
    More nonsense from you.

    It has already been shown that jurors from the first trial did not understand evidence and based their decisions outside of the law.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  6. #126
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Stop with the dishonesty.
    I just provided you the information which was being spoken about.
    I didn't make the claim that the jury accepted his self-defense alibi. It didn't. It is that claim that is nonsense.

    Had the jury accepted his claim, Dunn would have been acquitted. He wasn't.

    There is no link because the claim that the jury accepted his self-defense alibi is without foundation. No matter how much one repeats that claim or tries to evade the facts by claiming others 'don't know what they're talking about,' the reality remains the same. Dunn's self-defense alibi was rejected by both juries, with the only difference being his conviction on first degree murder by the second jury.

    Also, the condescending notion that the jury somehow didn't understand the evidence is completely absurd. The jury made a decision that was wholly consistent with the law. It is no surprise that the second jury reached exactly the same conclusion on the charges for which the first one convicted Dunn, even as it also convicted him of premeditated murder. Both juries had sufficient evidence.

    Had one or the other jury erred, there would have been legitimate basis not only to file an appeal but to prevail in that appeal. That won't happen.

    I realize some might have difficulty accepting the reality that Dunn's actions were outside the parameters of self-defense, but that's strictly their opinion.

    The evidence says otherwise. Both juries, which had all the evidence, not just the more limited amount that was published or broadcast by the media, reached similar conclusions. Dunn had not acted in self-defense. He killed an unarmed teen who was seated even as the teens were leaving. He didn't even report the shooting (almost certainly, because he feared the consequences of doing so; any rational person who acted in self-defense would immediately have reported his or her actions). In the end, he was held accountable for his crime.

  7. #127
    feckless bon vivant

    radioman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    lotusland
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,761

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post

    You can't even refute the arguments made, and instead want to make completely untrue assertions. That is a demonstration of addled reasoning.
    When I first read your response, I was hurt......hurt and confused.....hurt and confused and sad....hurt, confused, sad and misunderstood.
    My post was intended to be a homage to your always reasonable thinking.
    I'm surprised you, a clear-thinking, rational self-defense advocate didn't see my intent.
    Clearly, we agree on the salient points in the Dunn case.....

    #1---The shooter's version of the story should always be accepted. Shooters don't lie.

    #2---Indiscriminately emptying your pistol into a van is a smart move. Dunn should have had a larger magazine.

    #3---The shooter's mere perception of a deadly threat is enough to warrant deadly force. Shoot first and ask questions later is my motto. This type of philosophy will lead to a more civil society.

    #4---The true thug in this case is the dead guy. Sure he was unarmed and had no criminal record, but mouthy punks will invariably become criminals.

    #5---Loud "rap crap" is a threat in of itself.

    Now, if you'll excuse me, since I've cleared up this misunderstanding, I'm going to cruise to the mini-mart, top down on my 'vette, volume AND bass
    blasting, listening to "ABBA'S GREATEST HITS"

    "Dancing Queen" is my fave.....I hope nobody shoots me.
    No matter how cynical I become toward politicians, it's never enough.

  8. #128
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by radioman View Post
    When I first read your response, I was hurt......hurt and confused.....hurt and confused and sad....hurt, confused, sad and misunderstood.
    My post was intended to be a homage to your always reasonable thinking.
    I'm surprised you, a clear-thinking, rational self-defense advocate didn't see my intent.
    Clearly, we agree on the salient points in the Dunn case.....

    #1---The shooter's version of the story should always be accepted. Shooters don't lie.

    #2---Indiscriminately emptying your pistol into a van is a smart move. Dunn should have had a larger magazine.

    #3---The shooter's mere perception of a deadly threat is enough to warrant deadly force. Shoot first and ask questions later is my motto. This type of philosophy will lead to a more civil society.

    #4---The true thug in this case is the dead guy. Sure he was unarmed and had no criminal record, but mouthy punks will invariably become criminals.

    #5---Loud "rap crap" is a threat in of itself.

    Now, if you'll excuse me, since I've cleared up this misunderstanding, I'm going to cruise to the mini-mart, top down on my 'vette, volume AND bass
    blasting, listening to "ABBA'S GREATEST HITS"

    "Dancing Queen" is my fave.....I hope nobody shoots me.
    Typical absurd response of one who can not rationally debate the evidence.
    Last edited by Excon; 10-26-14 at 12:50 PM.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  9. #129
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I didn't make the claim that the jury accepted his self-defense alibi. It didn't.
    More dishonesty from you.
    I provided the link showing that at least three jurors from the first trial accepted his account.
    It is your failure for not accepting the truth.

    The fact that you keep appealing to the juries decision, which is a logical fallacy, after being told the discussion was about the actual evidence, just tells us you are not interested in actually discussing the evidence.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Had the jury accepted his claim, Dunn would have been acquitted. He wasn't.
    You are dishonestly tap dancing around what was claimed and proven.

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    There is no link because the claim that the jury accepted his self-defense alibi is without foundation. No matter how much one repeats that claim or tries to evade the facts by claiming others 'don't know what they're talking about,' the reality remains the same. Dunn's self-defense alibi was rejected by both juries, with the only difference being his conviction on first degree murder by the second jury.
    More dishonesty and straight up lies.
    The reality is -
    Three jurors accepted his account. As previously shown.
    Jurors did get the the evidence wrong.
    And he had no claim to self defense to the other charges.
    Your failure again for not understanding these things even though they have repeatedly been pointed out to you. That is all on you.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Also, the condescending notion that the jury somehow didn't understand the evidence is completely absurd. The jury made a decision that was wholly consistent with the law. It is no surprise that the second jury reached exactly the same conclusion on the charges for which the first one convicted Dunn, even as it also convicted him of premeditated murder. Both juries had sufficient evidence.
    Totally and utterly absurd.
    We are speaking about the first trial, and it has been pointed out that evidence was gotten wrong. Which you have been unable to refute.
    It was also pointed out that had he been found guilty for the reasoning that juror spoke about it would have been a misapplication of the law and miscarriage of justice. Which you have been unable to refute. Which yes, their being hung was consistent with the law.
    All you are going is speaking nonsense because you do not know what you are talking about . You never have.
    And you can stop confusing the first trial where he was not found guilty of murder with the second one where he was. The two are separate and distinct as well as the charges for which he was found guilty.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Had one or the other jury erred, there would have been legitimate basis not only to file an appeal but to prevail in that appeal. That won't happen.
    This is what you get for not paying attention.
    The jury was hung on the charge. That does not offer any avenue for appeal. Or do you really not know that?
    Stop talking nonsense.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I realize some might have difficulty accepting the reality that Dunn's actions were outside the parameters of self-defense, but that's strictly their opinion.
    This is you being dishonest again, as his actions were not. It is also why you refuse to discuss the actual evidence, because his actions were not.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The evidence says otherwise.
    NO it doesn't. Which is why you keep avoidong discussing it.

    So again, back to the stuff you keep avoiding, the actual evidence.

    Lets see if you will at least be honest here. (so far you have failed)

    The evidence says that Davis was the only one angry and irate and it was directed towards Dunn.
    It also shows that Davis got out of the Durango as Dunn stated.

    So for what purpose do you suppose the angry and irate Davis got out of the vehicle?
    The only logical conclusion from the evidence would be to carry through with his threats to Dunn.
    No other reason exists.
    Try debating the actual evidence for once.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Both juries, which had all the evidence, not just the more limited amount that was published or broadcast by the media, reached similar conclusions.
    Your continued appeal to authority is absurd and makes your argument a failure from the get.
    Your argument also fails as we saw the same evidence (you know, that stuff you wont actually discuss.) and had far more time to review and comprehend it.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    appeal to th Dunn had not acted in self-defense. He killed an unarmed teen who was seated even as the teens were leaving. He didn't even report the shooting (almost certainly, because he feared the consequences of doing so; any rational person who acted in self-defense would immediately have reported his or her actions). In the end, he was held accountable for his crime.
    Davis was not seated but outside of the vehicle when he was shot. That is the evidence.
    Dunn didn't have to report the shooting and his reason for not doing so immediately is more than credible.
    You saying what a rational person would do is arrogant. As rational people act differently, especially after such a traumatic experience

    You have provided nothing but nonsense, lies, logical fallacy, and made false comparisons, all the while avoiding actual evidence that continually keeps getting pointed out to you.
    That is called failing.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  10. #130
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    More dishonesty from you.
    You have shown no links that the jury exonerated Dunn. It didn't. A few jurors were undecided on the first degree murder charge. That's vastly different from stating that the jury accepted Dunn's self-defense claim.

    Davis was not seated but outside of the vehicle when he was shot. That is the evidence.
    And that is incorrect and not the evidence (and also unsourced). From CBS News:

    The state's medical examiner testified that the trajectory of Dunn's bullets into Davis' body showed that Davis was sitting down when he was shot.

    Michael Dunn verdict: Jury deadlocks on murder charge - CBS News

    You have provided nothing but nonsense, lies, logical fallacy, and made false comparisons...
    It's kind of ironic that for all this bluster, none of which gets to the heart of the evidence, I've provided links regarding the key evidence:

    1. Dunn shot unarmed teens. No one pointed a shotgun at Dunn.
    2. Davis was inside the vehicle when shot.
    3. The vehicle was attempting to drive away when Dunn opened fire.
    4. Dunn never reported his shooting to the police.

    As The New York Times reported:

    In the end, the jury found that Mr. Dunn intended to kill Mr. Davis and acted with premeditation as he reached into his glove compartment for his gun and fired 10 times at Mr. Davis and the Durango, even as it pulled away to evade the gunfire.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/02/us...c-dispute.html

    I'm still waiting for the link that the first jury accepted Dunn's self-defense alibi and acquitted him. There will be no such link, because that's not what happened. Instead, there was a deadlock on the premeditated murder charge.

Page 13 of 17 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •